11–20 of 141 posts
So for us who want to continue distribute across multiple distributions, even those that doesn't run systemd, is there only AppImage remaining now as a truly cross-distribution packaging format?
Maybe systemd should have been an API + a spec instead of an unportable implementation.
As a Linux normie, I've never understood why systemd is/was so much opinioned about.
So for us who want to continue distribute across multiple distributions, even those that doesn't run systemd, is there only AppImage remaining now as a truly cross-distribution packaging format?
As a Linux normie, I've never understood why systemd is/was so much opinioned about.
> The current version of Flatpak will continue to see a ton of improvements, but at the same time, the limits of what can be done with its decades-old design have become harder and harder to work around. As such, they’re also planning for and working on what they call Flatpak Next, or perhaps Flatpak 2.0, which is effectively a rewrite of Flatpak based on what they’ve learned over the years, making use of modern tech…
And if you look at the history page of Flatpak, you'll see that the project has been in development in some form or another for roughly 20 years https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/wiki/Flatpak's-History
While I think systemd is a great init system (as well as some other components under the systemd umbrella), I really dislike when components up in the stack hard-depend on it. We can't use GNOME, plasma-login-manager, and soon Flatpak without systemd. Maybe systemd should have been an API + a spec instead of an unportable implementation.
As a Linux normie, I've never understood why systemd is/was so much opinioned about.
I had a nightmare last week wherein I read a headline that systemd was writing its own kernel. When I woke up I realized it was a possibility, after all it has replaced GRUB. https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Systemd-boot